2023 Supreme(P&H) 2505
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
ANOOP CHITKARA, J.
Randhir Singh @ Dheera – Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
CRM-M NO. 22715 of 2022
Decided On : 15-05-2023
For the Petitioner:Mr. Charanjit Singh, Advocate.
Ms. Navreet K. Barnala, AAG, Punjab.
Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 438 - Anticipatory bail - The petitioner seeks bail in connection with multiple serious charges including armed assault and threats. The court granted interim bail, emphasizing the reversible nature of pre-trial incarceration, especially for first offenders, and the necessity of maintaining a balance between individual rights and the investigation process. (Paras 5, 7, 8, 11)
(B) Bail conditions - The court imposed strict conditions to ensure the safety of the victim and witnesses, including prohibition from contacting the victim and surrendering any weapons, reaffirming the requirement for proportionality in bail restrictions.(Para 10, 12, 13)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, along with several accomplices, allegedly attacked complainants at a residential property, using weapons including kirpans and rods during a quarrel at a marriage function, leading to injuries and a subsequent investigation. No previous criminal history was claimed by the petitioner. (Paras 3, 4)
Findings of Court:
The court found that pending proper investigation, the petitioner’s pre-trial incarceration would be unjust and made interim protection absolute with conditions to ensure compliance.(Paras 8, 10)
Issues: The core issues include the nature of allegations leading to the anticipatory bail application and the justification for pre-trial detention versus granting bail to the first offenders.(Paras 7, 10)
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that given the first offender status and no clear obstruction of investigation from the petitioner, the imposition of stringent bail conditions rather than incarceration was warranted to uphold both individual rights and the integrity of legal processes.(Paras 9, 13)
Result: Petition allowed; interim bail made absolute with conditions.
JUDGMENT
Mr. Anoop Chitkara, J.
| FIR No. | Dated | Police Station | Sections |
| 30 | 11.03.2022 | City Rampura, District Bathinda | 324, 323, 452, 148, 149, 506 IPC and offence under Section 307 IPC added vide DDR No.31 dated 04.04.2022 |
The petitioner apprehending arrest in the FIR captioned above has come up before this Court under Section 438 CrPC seeking anticipatory bail.
2. In paragraph 12 of the bail petition, the accused declares that he has no criminal antecedents.
3. The allegations are that the petitioner alongwith other accused, armed with kirpans, dandas, iron rods attacked the inmates by entering into the complainant's house, and brutally assaulted them.
4. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner contends that the custodial investigation would serve no purpose whatsoever, and the pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the petitioner and family. Interim protection granted to petitioner vide order dated 30.05.2022 is continuing till date.
5. Ld. counsel representing the State opposes bail.
Reasoning:
6. The defence plea as set up in paragraphs 3 & 4 are as follows:
"3. That the true facts of this case are that in the mid night of 09/10.03.2022 at about 12:30 AM in the neighbor the marriage function was took place of Jagsir Singh s/o Gora Singh and on the occurrence D.J. was running and Gurmeet Singh alias Saida, Sanny Singh s/o Gurmeet Singh alias Saida, Simarjit Kaur w/o Gurmeet Singh alias Saida, Kajal Kaur w/o Gurmeet Singh alias Saida, Santokh Singh s/o Veer Singh, Gurwinder Singh alias Bhindi s/o Gora Singh, Kulwinder Kaur d/o Gora Singh, Kalu Kaur d/o Gora Singh, Jagseer Singh s/o Gora Singh all residents of village Mehraj, Kothe Maha Singh (Vadian), Tehsil Phul, District Bathinda was done dance and for the running song a quarrel was made between them and the petitioners had gone for just to release them from other, but they made quarrel with the petitioners, but the petitioners were tried to linger the matter one pretext or the other, but the abovesaid persons made a call and called some unknown persons, who armed with deadly weapons, who came on the occurrence and made openly firing, whole the occurrence was recorded in the CCTV Cameras, which can produce by the petitioners. It is further stated that brother of petitioner no. 1 & father of the petitioner no. 2 i.e. Randhir Singh is the active member of BSP as Suba Secretary and that persons belongs to another political party, so they attacked upon us, who five fired and said by raising lalkaras loud that they will take rest after kill to brother of petitioner no. 1 & father of the petitioner no. 2 i.e. Randhir Singh alias Dheera, but the brother of petitioner no. 1 & father of the petitioner no. 2 Randhir Singh was not present at the spot, due to he was remained save, during this incident when mob of the many peoples ran back of the above said persons then they ran away from the apot and made injuries to other and they succeed to ran away just to take advantage of the dark.
4. That the petitioners had made multiple calls to the police at police help line No. 100, SHO Rampura Phul M. No. 7508018111 and police station phone no. 7508018140 at the time of occurrence and ASI Charanjit Singh came on the spot and made peace on single time and on the next day in the morning the police took the action against the petitioners at the instance the abovesaid persons and has arrested my brother Gurtej Singh and nephew Jagmeet Singh alias Roak and no action has been taken by the police against the actual accused persons. ASI Amrik Singh of P.S. City Rampura, came to the house of the petitioners in their absence and threatened to the family members of the petitioners that father of the brother of petitioner no. 1 & petitioner no. 2 i.e. Randhir Singh caught hold the cotton on his back and who persons already arrested by them, the water neem remained boil for their treatment."
7. Given the counter versions, the pre-trial incarceration might result in